Jezz, i hope those 8.87% people don't run wild at TR comments...

I like MS's OS a lot better than some of their other software. Their Server OS's have been really really good since Server 2000, with few mishaps. I don't like the vendor lock-in of having Office tied to data formats.
I am disappointed in Vista because it's such a large time gap to produce so little in return. But after SP1, it's a decent OS and no significant gripes.

When I talk with people it's usually either they love it or hate it, the haters moving quickly to OSX or shrugging off MS tax. Nobody I know, neither myself, nor my geeky brother, stay using Linux for very long without drifting back to Windows. For me it is getting sh*t done efficiently and without hassle and of course gaming. I grew up on PC gaming, man flight simulator on an Amber and black screen!

I think the biggest threat to MS isn't from the desktop, but from the mobile phone. I don't think we'll be using desktops much in 10-15 years, we'll all have mobile devices that we carry with us to do our home/work/fun cpu tasks. I was able to get away with working from my phone one slow friday. There's no need for the CPU to stay large and immobile anymore, however there are of course advantages to having large displays, so that is still a hurdle. The Operating system is less and less important compared to what you can pull off the web...

I think that Windows and Mac are both on the way out. I'm not currently a Linux user, but it seems to me that Linux adoption is up, since it's free to put Linux on a machine, but costs $100 to put Windows on it. Eventually someone is going to make a Linux distro that's going to catch on and then it will be all over for the big OS makers.

1993 called; they want their Linux fantasy back.

Hope springs eternal.

Haha, the biggest Linux achievement remains reaching the 1% threshold. ;)

In other news, Apple recommending that users install security software. Our little boy is growing up! http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/240255/apple-recommends-security-softwa...

Oh, no! It's yet another "Here are our guesses as to who is using what on the Internet based on spotty, piecemeal data, from which we extrapolate theoretical market-share numbers that don't need to be correlated with OEM sales data, mainly because those numbers may contradict us!"...;)

Millions of people like me use more than single browser every day, which is a fact that decimates any sort of "Net Applications" market-share estimates of browser use. But companies like Net Applications don't let piddling little facts like that stand in the way of their dog and pony show, do they? It's no accident that the very first thing the TGDaily article mentions is more of this browser market-share gobbledygook...;)

The last Mac sales numbers I saw clearly indicated that Apple's *world-wide* Mac market share perpetually hovers at ~2%, with the notable exception of the US where the Mac share is estimated at 3x-4x higher than the international average. In some countries, Apple's Mac market share falls well below 1%, as was true of India's billion + people last time I perused such data.

Interesting then that the "Net Applications" Mac market share number seems to reflect only the US and nobody else, although the numbers pretend to some kind of exhaustive, thorough, global analysis.

It's difficult to understand exactly what sort of methodology "Net Applications" is using here. Obviously, the nomenclature portends a study of who is using what on the Internet which is then extrapolated to supposedly mirror OEM and retail sales market-share data of some kind. But then we have statements like this to parse:

Of course, we were interested in finding out about the timeframe when Windows crossed the 90% market share mark on the way up. It turned out that we had to go back quite a bit and if we believe this story published in December 2005 by Ars Technica, then Microsoft cleared the 90% hurdle in 1993 or 1994 with Windows 3.11.

Circa 1993-1994, when AOL was king, the Internet had yet to boom and was not as it is today, of course, which means that the 90% market share mentioned above had absolutely nothing whatever to do with who was using what on the Internet. Clearly, estimates from that time period reflect OEM and retail sales figures as compiled by various means and people, and the methods that "Net Applications" uses today do not resemble the methods of estimating market share used then. But this doesn't stop "Net Applications" from seeking to place its estimates on an equal footing with OEM and retail sales estimates--even when it is clear that they are not equal at all.

Things get even murkier:

If we dive a bit deeper in the most recent operating system market share developments, then it is interesting to see that while Vista is now listed with a market share of nearly 20.5%, it is far from being able to pick up the market share older Windows versions are losing. For example, Windows XP lost about 2.4 points (from 68.67% to 66.31%) over the past three months, but Vista gained only 2.1 points (18.33% to 20.45%). And we are talking only about XP here: Windows 2000 lost an additional 0.35 points, Windows NT 0.03 points, Windows 98 0.05 points and Windows Me 0.02 points, according to Net Applications.

No matter how many times I read this I still cannot understand what the author is saying, and I think that is primarily because the author doesn't understand it himself...;)

First, the Vista market share quoted is what: sales data, Internet data, what? Sales data of the great majority of OEM and retail boxes shipping today would, I think, show an enormous market share for Vista since just about all retail and OEM boxes currently shipping ship with Vista. Obviously, then, *this* Net Applications' market-share number does not concern itself with current hardware sales data of any kind, but is talking about looking at who is doing what with what on the Internet, again (back and forth we go.) Also, obviously from a retail sales perspective currently, Win XP's market share is nowhere near 66%. When the author talks about Windows 2k, NT, and 9x, he states that these are losing share to "something" he strangely enough cannot identify, and does not wish to identify as Vista...;) No, instead he says:

Of course, the market share loss benefits other operating systems, especially Mac OS X and Linux.

And there you have the rationale behind this author's completely confused "market-share" analysis, which really doesn't even come close to actually being a market-share analysis of who is *buying* what whether they are using the Internet or not. So what is it? It's just an "analysis" of who is using what on the Internet--an analysis based on the author's unknown and unpublicized formula for data compilation. It is, I think, an apologetic analysis undertaken with the idea to promote OSes with absolutely the lowest percentages of market share.

I think that to call such a mishmash a "market share analysis" is highly misleading. If only the author would simply omit the words "market share" and say: "This is our estimate of who is using what on the Internet currently, and is not to be mistaken for any kind of a market share analysis based on current sales data!"--then I could take both him and his analysis with a much smaller grain of salt...;)

I think that Windows and Mac are both on the way out. I'm not currently a Linux user, but it seems to me that Linux adoption is up, since it's free to put Linux on a machine, but costs $100 to put Windows on it. Eventually someone is going to make a Linux distro that's going to catch on and then it will be all over for the big OS makers.

In other words Windows is roughly 10% away from owning the entire
world's computing.
Quite an enviable position for any company to be in would say...

Well, I like MS OS (Windows XP and hoping for Windows 7).

But I really like to see this number drop to 50-60% if not lower. Then maybe MS will get it self off its Arse and develop something better.

MacOS and Linux keep coming out with creative things.. It be nice to see same type of innovation in the future from MS.

This however does not change that I'll be on Windows. (XP now, 7 in the future) for some time to come. I like the openness of the platform (so mac is out) and the stupified simplicity of windows (linux is out). But still hate it. Its a love/hate realtionship :P

In any case, having such a standardized environment was certainly a boon for software development and the spread of computers as a commodity.

And yet by acknowledging this obvious reality, you're unceremoniously dumped into the default category of M$ fanboi which of course is uncool because it's M$.

WaltC couldn't have said it any better; the methodology at use is dubious at best.

You don't always have to jump on the horse and grab your lance and run into the fray. You could actually criticize Microsoft once in a while. You won't hurt them if you do - they won't lose any market share or profitability nor will their coding suffer any for it. The company *can* and *does* make mistakes.

Absolutely. Who here would deny that M$ has problems with its products? But M$ is often reviled for things over which it has no control (i.e., third party IHVs and ISVs) and yet still takes the PR hit in the public eye. It's like a recognized handshake for the cool /. kids to rail against M$ from their Mom's basement.

If anything, M$ could use some cheerleaders; Lord knows they have enough bandwagon detractors that just add to the white noise.

Dear malware writers: OS10 is the future!

so what's the other 0.7? Non-Apple BSD flavors?

Obligatory "OMG Year Of The Linux Desktop" comment.

Except that this time, with all the netbooks around and more support and demand all the time from the consumer electronics industry ... who knows...

With 1% market share all but guaranteed based on current trends, how long before we see 5% linux share? Perhaps a better question, how long before we see 15-20% combined linux and mac share?

Linux' share will increase. 1% will certainly be reached.

Come on Linux! You can do it! 1% next year!